Even if the argument for a link was plausible, testing for it is impossible... Imo, the link is not plausible. I have been playing games with varying degrees of violence since about 1982-ish and I've never so much as raised my hand to my wife let alone been convicted of a violent act... But to accurately test this, they would need to do the same sort of testing that you would on whether or not breast feeding creates a smarter person.

eg. From birth to a certain age, expose the person to games etc but keep them exclusively non violent. Measure the persons aggressive tendencies. Wind back time and repeat the exact same sequence (same breakfast every day, parents do the same things) except expose them to violent media and games. Compare results.

ie. impossible.

The far more plausible explanation is that people with violent tendencies are attracted to violent media/games.

Everything points to "violent personalities are attracted to violence" and yet people keep trying to say that violent material creates violent people. Further, regular people who are non-violent may also like violent material purely because of escapism. We don't want to be violent throughout our lives, but we enjoy violence in our entertainment precisely because we can differentiate between the fantasy and the reality.

The worst case scenario is an otherwise normal person is mistreated (ie. bullied kids at school) and eventually snaps. This sort of person would be attracted to violent games because loners/outcasts are far more likely to use their leisure time being powerful/heroic/in charge, because it's the one environment they can feel in control. Again, the violence may be influenced by the media/game, but originates in the abuse they suffer at the hands of their peers.

Hell, the ending of Far Cry 3 (*spoiler alert*) is a great example of violent nature vs violent media. Being offered the choice to kill my friends and stay as a warrior made no sense to me as the reason my character wanted power in the first place was to rescue my friends (ignoring how shallow the personas of the characters were). I watched the alternate ending on you tube but my own personal ethic made if a no brainer to save my friends and depart, regardless of the consequences. It was only sheer curiousity that got me to watch the other ending, my entire moral judgement was that even portraying the main character as a person who had lost his way in a "heart of darkness" style descent, he would still remember that he only becamse a monster to save the ones he loved.

If a story about a person who goes from never hurting a fly to happily filleting anything with a pulse doesn't somehow influence me to be violent, I'm not sure what will...

Of course, all of that is anecdotal and doesn't really prove much of anything, but if violent media creates violent people, there would be literally millions of gamers snapping as they saturate their lives with violence. That there is not, and the article freely admits that rampages are so infrequent that it is difficult to draw any significant conclusions, kinda bears out that violent media doesn't create monsters, monsters like violent media...

Yet it is not at all clear whether, over longer periods, such a habit increases the likelihood that a person will commit a violent crime, like murder, rape, or assault, much less a Newtown-like massacre. (Such calculated rampages are too rare to study in any rigorous way, researchers agree.)

Yes, it is clear! Because it's always been a violent world and always will be. Take away guns and games and you know what'll change? Not a single damn thing.

I thought canucks were friendly ey?

In one recent study, Christopher Barlett, a psychologist at Iowa State University, led a research team that had 47 undergraduates play “Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance” for 15 minutes. Afterward, the team took various measures of arousal, both physical and psychological. It also tested whether the students would behave more aggressively, by having them dole out hot sauce to a fellow student who, they were told, did not like spicy food but had to swallow the sauce.

Sure enough, compared with a group who had played a nonviolent video game, those who had been engaged in “Mortal Kombat” were more aggressive across the board. They gave their fellow students significantly bigger portions of the hot sauce.

I know right, I became aroused after playing Devil May Cry and sprayed hot sauce all over...

Yet it is not at all clear whether, over longer periods, such a habit increases the likelihood that a person will commit a violent crime, like murder, rape, or assault, much less a Newtown-like massacre. (Such calculated rampages are too rare to study in any rigorous way, researchers agree.)

Yes, it is clear! Because it's always been a violent world and always will be. Take away guns and games and you know what'll change? Not a single damn thing.

"There are two kinds of people in this world; people who love delis, and people you shouldn’t associate with.” - Damon Runyan